Unofficial Preview Fremantle vs Port Adelaide - Key Areas\Matchups

[strobe00]

and Duffield/Gray when he goes forward.

dear god no.

 

[Mogumber]

dear god no.

You got any other ideas ?

 

[clivenator26]

Last time we lost to Port, Ross said we were a mediocre team, this week he says we are pretty handy. I love the man, he fills me with confidence every time he does a presser, he is a pro.

 

[strobe00]

You got any other ideas ?

Ibbo? Crowley sticking with him? Sutcliffe? Even Mz potentially. Just not Duffield.

 

[Mogumber]

Ibbo? Crowley sticking with him? Sutcliffe? Even Mz potentially. Just not Duffield.

Mzungu maybe. Not Crowley, he'd cut him up when he went forward.

 

[Righteo]

Port supporters want to claim that they are both the better side and the underdog. They definitely seemed to have got a lot of confident from that training drill against Carlton. No way do they get anywhere near that amount of time against us. At least our confidence comes from beating an almost a full strength Hawks without our leading goal kicker and one of our AA defenders.

Dockers by 4 goals (even without Fyfe, Barlow)

Maybe it's just an homage to Hawthorn fans?

 

[strobe00]

Mzungu maybe. Not Crowley, he'd cut him up when he went forward.

Only Dangerfield has given Crowley problems that I've seen when he's taken him forward. And Gray will be switching between the forward line and midfield to drop his run-with/tag (hopefully it's Crowley for mine) if it's only being applied midfield. Having a different guy just pick him up when he's in the forward line will make Gray very hard to control.

If Gray wants to stay in the forward line all game, then that's a win for us and someone like Sutcliffe (or Mz if he doesn't have other duties) can pick him up. But if he's bouncing back and forth, with a lot of time in the midfield then I'd be happy for Crowley to do his thing down there, and be supported by the rest of our defenders.

My preference obviously. Either way, Duff is about the last bloke I'd pick to keep an eye on Gray.

 

[Righteo]

Ibbo? Crowley sticking with him? Sutcliffe? Even Mz potentially. Just not Duffield.

Sutcliffe easily, and then probably about another 10-15 options I'd take ahead of Duff vs Gray.

Nightmare fuel.

 

[Mogumber]

My preference obviously. Either way, Duff is about the last bloke I'd pick to keep an eye on Gray.

Crowley will go to Boak I reckon. So someone will have to be accountable for Gray. It probably will be Mzungu. He's on fire lately.

 

[Nothing]

I know you can never isolate just one thing when fortunes turn around, but I've always thought Walters is just about your most important player.

Astute observation . He is one of the best.

 

[strobe00]

Crowley will go to Boak I reckon. So someone will have to be accountable for Gray. It probably will be Mzungu. He's on fire lately.

Very possible. Boak sounds like he's been in very good form, and is one of their best. Crowley has proven that he can effectively tag Boak in the past.

Gray is probably their most damaging player at the moment, so I'd agree... he needs a minder. Mz is comfortable down back and onball, but Gray does a lot of inside work as well. Mz is also very handy running and linking through the midfield, or rolling back to help out the defense and that's harder to do with a guy that's running on ball. Easier to do with a more outside mid.

For mine, I'd rather bite the bullet and tag Gray with Crowley, run Mundy and Boak head-to-head and have Mz running with Hartlett or Polec. If Boak goes ballistic then we can always switch Crowls to Boak, and have Mz move onto Gray. Does leave Hartlett or Polec with more freedom... not ideal, but might have to be the go if Boak starts running riot.

 

[clogged]

It isn't, true... but when we were lacking sonny and balla for the North game it had a pretty massive impact on our ability to score. Not sure what other options we had for that game that would have made a difference.

Can't remember if crozier played or was wafling for that game.

Edit: Just checked. Crozier played the North game. We had Pav, Mayne, Tabs and Crozier that are all forwards. Sonny was injured and Balla was suspended. What other changes would you have wanted?

As for the Sydney game, we had Balla, Tabs, Clarke and Mayne that game. No Crozier admittedly. The thing that stood out clearest in my memory of that game was our wretched inability to prevent Sydney's easy handballs out the flank of stoppages, which allowed for Shaw and Malceski to fly on past and cut us up with a quick run and kick. Our clearance defense was p*ss poor that game. And as for our scoring ability, delivery into the forward line was an issue there from memory... as it was against North.

Taberner didn't play against North.

If you are going to narrow in on the problem, it has been solved in many respects by Taberner and Crozier. It was meant to be solved by Gumbleton and Sylvia, with a view to younger blokes like Tabs and Croz needing more time.

Gumbleton is perpetually injured, Sylvia is a hack. The team got where it wanted to be, but possibly too late.

 

[JamFrank]

Who will they send Cornes to? Last time he wasn't really a hard tag, although he was near Hill most of the time, until Hill got injured then he moved to Fyfe. Be interesting to see what they do with him.

 

[Mogumber]

He'll go to Hill. Might leave Mundy off the chain, and maybe as Strobe said Mundy/Boak head to head.
Lachie Neal will have to have another good game.

 

[strobe00]

Taberner didn't play against North.

If you are going to narrow in on the problem, it has been solved in many respects by Taberner and Crozier. It was meant to be solved by Gumbleton and Sylvia, with a view to younger blokes like Tabs and Croz needing more time.

Oops. Quite true. Was switching between the lineups for the Swans and North games and must have gotten confused. Tabs was omitted from the line-up in the North game after a 4-touch performance in the Sydney game.

Crozier got a run of games earlier in the year and did OK, but not well enough to retain his spot. A succession of alternatives in the forward line (including Sylvia) have shown that it might just have been a tough position to play. Personally, I reckon his improved physicality and effort have been at least partly a result of him being run as an inside mid on a few occasions in the intervening WAFL games, between his earlier run of games and his recent return, but he's delivering a fair bit more in this run of games than he did earlier in the year in any case.

Tabs' improvement is even more stark. It just seemed to click over a very short period of time in the bigs. Wasn't watching him in the WAFL so no idea what he'd been working on there.

Gumbleton is perpetually injured, Sylvia is a hack. The team got where it wanted to be, but possibly too late.

The first is true. The second, I'm still not certain of. But the last is likely right as well. As you say, Gumby and Sylvia not stepping up to the mark have undoubtedly contributed to that. In a way, it's good for the future that Crozier and Tabs have had the opportunity to boost their rate of development, but we've let some games slip in the interim that've made life hard for this run at the finals, and this season in general.

Some sh*tty luck with injuries and MRP haven't helped, along with an absolutely f*cked FIXture.

 

[clogged]

He's a hack until he isn't one. So far, hack status confirmed.

 

[strobe00]

Who will they send Cornes to? Last time he wasn't really a hard tag, although he was near Hill most of the time, until Hill got injured then he moved to Fyfe. Be interesting to see what they do with him.

I think they'd be crazy to let Hill run around unattended. If Barlow ends up missing then they may chance their arm by tagging Mundy and trying to control the clearances. But letting Hill run about by himself would surely be playing with fire.

Will be very surprised if they're stupid enough to let him run about without some company.

Cornes to Hill would be my bet, as they'd like their chances with two of our best three inside mids potentially being out of the team.

 

[JamFrank]

I think they'd be crazy to let Hill run around unattended. If Barlow ends up missing then they may chance their arm by tagging Mundy and trying to control the clearances. But letting Hill run about by himself would surely be playing with fire.

Will be very surprised if they're stupid enough to let him run about without some company.

Cornes to Hill would be my bet.

I think someone on the Port board mentioned a head to head with Matt White, which would be a massive win for us IMO. Don't think he has the defensive capabilities to stop Hilly doing as he pleases, and he's more of a straight line runner (albeit a very quick one).

 

[Taylor]

Hill and Pearce tore it up against Port the last home game, something like 25 inside fifties between them.

Port had so many uncontested possessions against Carlton, I feel that if we tighten that up it could be the difference alone that gets us over the line.

 

[Carnthedockers]

I know a bloke who catches up with the Gu each week. Apparently they are allowed 2 minutes of football questions each time and that's it. When asked about this week his response was "we will win". Now I know that should be every players response, but it's still good to hear as a supporter!

 

[strobe00]

I think someone on the Port board mentioned a head to head with Matt White, which would be a massive win for us IMO. Don't think he has the defensive capabilities to stop Hilly doing as he pleases, and he's more of a straight line runner (albeit a very quick one).

I'd take a head-to-head with Hilly vs. just about anyone else in the league, so long as it was a head-to-head and not a run-with. Anything that gives Hill more freedom is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. There are few in the AFL that're as damaging in space and with the ball in hand.

Hilly's usually also a good two-way runner, so it's not like he'll just be running ahead of the play to pick up cheap possies and leave his man free to run riot. If White and Hilly run head-to-head, I'd see that as a massive win for us as well. Might be proven wrong, but pretty happy with that match-up if it happens.

 

[strobe00]

Hill and Pearce tore it up against Port the last home game, something like 25 inside fifties between them.

Looks like just the 7 between them according to Footywire. 4 to PearceD and 3 to Hilly. They got a lot of kicks though... 28 between them. Though I'd rather the split be 18 to Hill and 10 to PearceD if it happens again (was vice versa in reality).

18 Kicks to Hilly would be terrific. Just remembered that graph I put together earlier in the year. We've got a 100% record when Hilly gets 18 kicks or more. Fortunate coincidence that... I'll take it as an omen! Here it is again:

 

[go_the_dockers]

I'd take a head-to-head with Hilly vs. just about anyone else in the league, so long as it was a head-to-head and not a run-with. Anything that gives Hill more freedom is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. There are few in the AFL that're as damaging in space and with the ball in hand.

Hilly's usually also a good two-way runner, so it's not like he'll just be running ahead of the play to pick up cheap possies and leave his man free to run riot. If White and Hilly run head-to-head, I'd see that as a massive win for us as well. Might be proven wrong, but pretty happy with that match-up if it happens.

You simply do not want Matt White getting goal side of you, he has elite speed and you will not catch him if you give him a 5m head start. Hill is not defensive enough and you would not want to make him that as you would rob his offensive game.

If Matt White gets goal side it normally ends in a port goal. I would rather somebody else on him.

 

[strobe00]

You simply do not want Matt White getting goal side of you, he has elite speed and you will not catch him if you give him a 5m head start. Hill is not defensive enough and you would not want to make him that as you would rob his offensive game.

If Matt White gets goal side it normally ends in a port goal. I would rather somebody else on him.

To each their own.

EDIT: White is fast, but even he can't outrun a Hill kick. Other midfielders or defenders can jam up on White when he goes for a run, to try to stem the damage. Much harder to stop a pinpoint 50 m kick from Hill from doing damage.

That's why I'd take that match-up.

 

[Righteo]

I think they'd be crazy to let Hill run around unattended. If Barlow ends up missing then they may chance their arm by tagging Mundy and trying to control the clearances. But letting Hill run about by himself would surely be playing with fire.

Will be very surprised if they're stupid enough to let him run about without some company.

Cornes to Hill would be my bet, as they'd like their chances with two of our best three inside mids potentially being out of the team.

I actually can't recall Mundy ever being tagged.